News Trump: World Would Be Better With Saddam & Gaddafi

[RummyBoy]

A lot of people don't know the Libyans had free health care, free electricity and loads of other benefits. Gaddafi was nothing like the monster he was painted out to be.

Donald Trump: World would be '100%' better with Hussein, Gadhafi in power - CNNPolitics.com

[Rob]

Libya was one of the wealthiest, and had one of highest standards of living of all the countries in Africa. But Gaddafi didn't want to play by U.S. rules, so he had to be removed. The media made him out to be a bad guy, which gave the U.S. government justification to go into a sovereign nation, and ruthlessly removing the leader that lead them in years and years of prosperity.

'Merica!!!

[Rochard]

I cannot comment about Gaddafi; I don't know enough about him or his government to comment.

With Saddam.... Frankly, he wasn't fully in control of Iraq, and the population centers he was in control of he was rather brutal. He started a war with Iraq (although you can argue the US encouraged this), invaded Kuwait, and then shot at our planes enforcing the no fly zones. I think Saddam needed to go.

However, I also think Middle Eastern problems are Middle Eastern problems and we need to stop interfering. Problems in the Middle East need to be handled by other countries in the Middle East. We should only step in when it directly affects the West.

[michael.kickass]

One of the few things he's right about.

[Barry-xlovecam]

Just think, if the Trumpstster has been president ...

[RummyBoy]

Originally Posted by Rob

Libya was one of the wealthiest, and had one of highest standards of living of all the countries in Africa. But Gaddafi didn't want to play by U.S. rules, so he had to be removed. The media made him out to be a bad guy, which gave the U.S. government justification to go into a sovereign nation, and ruthlessly removing the leader that lead them in years and years of prosperity.

That's just about spot on. Gaddafi and his London educated family were very regular, moderate and Gaddafi was taking his country forward but was ruthlessly slain along with other family members and Libya thrown into disaster. Gaddafi's son Saif is on trial I believe as we speak. Of course, Bashar Al-Assad was also London educated I believe and it seems to be a curse

No doubt, Iraq would be 1000% better of with Saddam too. They contained him over Kuwait and that's all that was needed.

Libya today is not a country. No-one seems to know what it has become.

Iraq today is capable of creating the kind of instability in the region but also in the wider world that we don't yet know.

[dyna mo]

Originally Posted by Rob

Libya was one of the wealthiest, and had one of highest standards of living of all the countries in Africa. But Gaddafi didn't want to play by U.S. rules, so he had to be removed. The media made him out to be a bad guy, which gave the U.S. government justification to go into a sovereign nation, and ruthlessly removing the leader that lead them in years and years of prosperity.

'Merica!!!

actually, gaddafi was ousted due to the civil war there, and the atrocities his government committed on Libyans in response, not 'Merica. the USA had good relations with Libya since the late 1980s, up until their civil war, which was a part of the Arab Spring, again, not USA.


and Trump's wrong, the world would not be a better place with those guys.

[baddog]

Isn't that common knowledge?

[RummyBoy]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

Trump's wrong, the world would not be a better place with those guys.

I'm not that supportive of Trump now because he's playing the hard card too far, pushing too many limits and not thinking enough before he opens his mouth but I have to admit, if you listen to him on the middle east issues, a lot of what he says makes sense. This is the full interview:

[MiamiBoyz]

He has good points and considering that the US government has done nothing but LIE we (the people) have no clue as to what really goes on. Just what we are spoon fed via the media and carefully censored and controlled.

[bronco67]

Sometimes that idiot is accidentally correct. Maybe Libya and Iraq wouldn't be better -- but the world sure as fuck would be better. ISIS wouldn't be running amok.

[CarlosTheGaucho]

Hard to argue with that, there could never have been a more effective way how to absolutely destabilise the middle east and north africa in no time.

Even Without extensive knowledge or research you can simply use the before and after comparison to see the results this has brought to a region that has historically never been and never will be stable without a strong authoritarian rule present.

Now if somebody did this for money (like spending trillions on invading Iraq), notwithstanding how wrong and utterly criminal this is, at least there's an understandable motive. But if anybody would do this for 'moral' reasons that would be plain insane.

[pimpmaster9000]

rule of thunb: If the USA hates him, he is probably the right man to rule the county

[j3rkules]

Just on the headline alone - rump: We?d be better off if Hussein and Gadhafi were still in power - Trump is hardly wrong. Someone in Saudi Arabia got #$%$ off at Saddam Hussein, probably because of some oil money lost, and the Saudis called in their buddy "W" to spend millions of U.S. dollars, partially funded by Saudi Arabia I read somewhere recently...and Bush attacked Iraq when he should have attacked Iran...created the disaster that is Iraq followed up by Obama and the vacuum created and then filled by ISIL. That's the story folks...don't matter whether you are a Dem or a Repub...that's the simplicity of the oil business. 4000 + American soldiers dead. Quaddafi might be another story, but having a dictator in power, at least we know where we stand. Right now, we have turmoil in and around Iraq and Libya, with thousands of refugees, all because of oil and attacking the wrong country. There are good dictators and bad dictators. Hussein controlled his country and there was no vacuum because he treated everyone the same, except for those in Tikrit. Qaddafi, the same. And there were no major problems, except maybe profit-taking by U.S. oil companies was difficult to do. 4000 + American soldiers dead.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I cannot comment about Gaddafi; I don't know enough about him or his government to comment.

With Saddam.... Frankly, he wasn't fully in control of Iraq, and the population centers he was in control of he was rather brutal. He started a war with Iraq (although you can argue the US encouraged this), invaded Kuwait, and then shot at our planes enforcing the no fly zones. I think Saddam needed to go.

However, I also think Middle Eastern problems are Middle Eastern problems and we need to stop interfering. Problems in the Middle East need to be handled by other countries in the Middle East. We should only step in when it directly affects the West.

Gaddafi Saddam, Assad, Ali Khamenei, al-Saud, Al Maktoum, and all the others are vindictive bastards. Rule countries full of vindictive bastards trying to replace them.

Tribal maps.







Now think of it like this. Each of these States want there Governor to rule the entire USA.



There are no real elections, it's a case of those who kill the most, win. Once in power States that didn't win, will still by vying for power that can only be gained with force.

With me so far? Now the interesting bit.

The priests are telling the soldiers if they die in battle they go straight to heaven. And rather than only living in that State for a couple centuries. Your family goes back millennia.

This is much like Europe was until the 16th Century, even then the Dukes and Barons had to be looked after to keep them loyal. Look at the English Civil War line up of troops.

The problem is, while the oil remains, it is the West's problem. We need to grow up and make sure the vindictive bastard is our vindictive bastard, before someone else gets him.

[Paul Markham]

The West as a whole would be better off. A lot of arms dealers and contractors would be poorer though.

[Barry-xlovecam]

The Crucifixion of Ali al-Nimr: When Will the U.S. Stop Covering Up Saudi Human-Rights Abuses? - The Atlantic

Our (USA) friends and allies

[Barry-xlovecam]

I really think that Europe would be a much better example to use ...

The USA is more racially and politically divided. Tribalism and Nationalism are much more closely related.

The individual states in the USA are political divisions with similar mixes of peoples.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by jerkules

Just on the headline alone - rump: We?d be better off if Hussein and Gadhafi were still in power - Trump is hardly wrong. Someone in Saudi Arabia got #$%$ off at Saddam Hussein, probably because of some oil money lost, and the Saudis called in their buddy "W" to spend millions of U.S. dollars, partially funded by Saudi Arabia I read somewhere recently...and Bush attacked Iraq when he should have attacked Iran...created the disaster that is Iraq followed up by Obama and the vacuum created and then filled by ISIL. That's the story folks...don't matter whether you are a Dem or a Repub...that's the simplicity of the oil business. 4000 + American soldiers dead. Quaddafi might be another story, but having a dictator in power, at least we know where we stand. Right now, we have turmoil in and around Iraq and Libya, with thousands of refugees, all because of oil and attacking the wrong country. There are good dictators and bad dictators. Hussein controlled his country and there was no vacuum because he treated everyone the same, except for those in Tikrit. Qaddafi, the same. And there were no major problems, except maybe profit-taking by U.S. oil companies was difficult to do. 4000 + American soldiers dead.

You missed a few things.... Iraq attacked Kuwait, and suddenly Saudi Arabia got very nervous. Say want you want about Bush and his (their?) relationship with Saudi Arabia, but.... At that time Saudi Arabia - and Kuwait - was very important to us. Kuwait fell quickly, and if Saddam turned on Saudi Arabia... We would have been fucked. One country would have controlled a vast amount of oil, and could have shut down the US and all of Europe just by saying "no more oil".

[Barry-xlovecam]

Gaddafi made a point of challenging the western world with his terrorist acts and constant rhetoric. Gaddafi made himself a useless POS.
Saddam on the other hand was a flexible dictator. Had Saddam have never invaded Kuwait he would still be our 'man' in Iraq as he was the enemy of the USA's enemy Iran.

We just need to replace our dependence on what these guys have to sell -- oil. Then we really would have no interest if they kill each other

[spads]

Originally Posted by crucifissio

rule of thunb: If the USA hates him, he is probably the right man to rule the county

You heard it here first. Crucifissio thinks Hitler was the right guy for Germany :D

[nico-t]

He is 100% right and everyone who is awake already knows this.

The brainwashed zombies among us will be surprised about his comments and will not understand it. They believe the 'good vs evil' fairytales of the media.

[mineistaken]

Trump is 100% right as most of the time.

Originally Posted by Rob

Libya was one of the wealthiest, and had one of highest standards of living of all the countries in Africa. But Gaddafi didn't want to play by U.S. rules, so he had to be removed. The media made him out to be a bad guy, which gave the U.S. government justification to go into a sovereign nation, and ruthlessly removing the leader that lead them in years and years of prosperity.

'Merica!!!

[pimpmaster9000]

Originally Posted by spads

You heard it here first. Crucifissio thinks Hitler was the right guy for Germany :D

As somebody who actually lived in Lybia for 2 years I think I know a bit more on the subject than you do. I actually had dinner with ghadaffi, me and like 400 other people but still

Every country the USA has graced since ww2 is worse off than if the USA had just stayed at home. Destabilizing shit from asia to the middle east you guys are now not only fucking up entire regions, but now you are starting to fuck up the entire world. "the world will do as its told" is a foreign policy every failed empire before you championed...americans talked themselves in to believing that they can control the other 95% of the non american world population, whilst being unable to regulate shit in their own country...hilarious LOL

what makes you guys think "you got this" is beyond me funny you should mention hitler, you guys invaded more countries than he did and more than the roman empire for that matter

and yes, if the USA is against him then he is probably the right man for your country...I base this on the fact that the USA does not mean its own citizens well, let alone others...in the USA the student debt is at 1trillion$, medical bankruptcy is the number one cause of personal bankruptcy, it has 50% of the worlds prison population, it is the definition of plutocracy with a money dependant election system...do you really believe such a system means other countries well?

you guys are the mafia LOL

[MrBottomTooth]

I just remember poor Gaddafi getting a knife up his anus before they killed him. No one deserves a knife in the ass.

[CPA-Rush]

i disagree it would not be better with those dictators , buy usa is not a democracy for the rest of the world .

[Phoenix]

Didn't the both start trading oil in things other than USD?
Dead shortly after.

[RummyBoy]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Didn't the both start trading oil in things other than USD?
Dead shortly after.

Yes, well observed. One of the main reasons for attacking Gaddafi was that he wanted to trade oil in gold backed dinars and was encouraging others to follow his plan, which would have devastated the petrodollar.

Gadhafi?s Gold-money Plan Would Have Devastated Dollar

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by RummyBoy

Trump: World Would Be Better With Saddam & Gaddafi

And he's absolutely right. There would be no ISIS and this guy would still be alive...

[MiamiBoyz]

Hell, I think the world would be a better place if Hitler was still in power.

[deonbell]

I agree. Seems like the US was telling every leader to step down during the Arab spring. We had no idea who was behind all this craziness and who would fill the void. Iran put their insurrection down fast and brutal, With no US press allowed. Now the US is gonna let them have a nuke.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

I really think that Europe would be a much better example to use ...

The USA is more racially and politically divided. Tribalism and Nationalism are much more closely related.

The individual states in the USA are political divisions with similar mixes of peoples.

I used the USA as most here are American.

Originally Posted by spads

You heard it here first. Crucifissio thinks Hitler was the right guy for Germany :D

His problem was he wanted to rule the World. Much like ISIS's dream.

[nico-t]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Didn't the both start trading oil in things other than USD?
Dead shortly after.

Yep. That is the sole reason US started 'liberating' the people in those countries. Now look at the results. Everything is completely destroyed and fucked up.

[filipus891]

if trump wins the elections it will be a clear portrayal of the good old american way! i am sure he will have the best foreign policy! he will spread his democracy to all corners of the world!

[spads]

Originally Posted by crucifissio

As somebody who actually lived in Lybia for 2 years I think I know a bit more on the subject than you do. I actually had dinner with ghadaffi, me and like 400 other people but still

Every country the USA has graced since ww2 is worse off than if the USA had just stayed at home. Destabilizing shit from asia to the middle east you guys are now not only fucking up entire regions, but now you are starting to fuck up the entire world. "the world will do as its told" is a foreign policy every failed empire before you championed...americans talked themselves in to believing that they can control the other 95% of the non american world population, whilst being unable to regulate shit in their own country...hilarious LOL

what makes you guys think "you got this" is beyond me funny you should mention hitler, you guys invaded more countries than he did and more than the roman empire for that matter

and yes, if the USA is against him then he is probably the right man for your country...I base this on the fact that the USA does not mean its own citizens well, let alone others...in the USA the student debt is at 1trillion$, medical bankruptcy is the number one cause of personal bankruptcy, it has 50% of the worlds prison population, it is the definition of plutocracy with a money dependant election system...do you really believe such a system means other countries well?

you guys are the mafia LOL

Well that's nice, but I'm not from the US so really you're just ranting like some lunatic. Do you know what's hysterical is that the people who criticize the US the most are usually from countries that are complete shit holes. You almost never see rampant anti-US rhetoric from successful countries :D

[Google Expert]

Hitler did nothing wrong.

[NewNick]

Originally Posted by Muad'Dib

Hitler did nothing wrong.

I don't know, the endless Vagner and saluting was rather tiresome.

[RummyBoy]

Originally Posted by nico-t

Everything is completely destroyed and fucked up.

Very true but there is hope. Celente puts it succinctly in this interview when he says US failure to get Syria (ie because of Russia) could put the damper on Wolfowitz doctrine:

[pimpmaster9000]

Originally Posted by spads

Well that's nice, but I'm not from the US so really you're just ranting like some lunatic. Do you know what's hysterical is that the people who criticize the US the most are usually from countries that are complete shit holes. You almost never see rampant anti-US rhetoric from successful countries :D

Actually no, the USA is an incompetent terrorist nation and the fact that small countries complain is directly linked to the pussy ass nature of the USA that bullies weak countries over lies and corporate democracy